As per case facts, a teacher was terminated by the management, leading to a School Tribunal order for reinstatement with full backwages. The management challenged this, while the teacher sought ... execution for higher backwages than awarded by the Executing Court, leading to two petitions heard analogously, including WP 827 of 2015. The management argued the teacher's appointment was irregular and not against a sanctioned post, citing a reserved category vacancy. The teacher contended his appointment was regular, approved, and termination illegal. The question arose whether the School Tribunal's order of reinstatement with full backwages could be sustained, considering the tribunal's flawed findings on vacant posts and selection, and the practicalities of reinstatement. Finally, the Court found the tribunal's findings on post availability and selection perverse. Despite the Education Officer's approval, the Court deemed reinstatement inappropriate due to the lack of a vacant post, the teacher's age, and prior reinstatement issues. It modified the order, granting a lump sum compensation of fifteen lakhs to the teacher in lieu of reinstatement and backwages.